Send me email updates about messages I've received on the site and the latest news from The CafeMom Team.
By signing up, you certify that you are female and accept the Terms of Service and have read the
Privacy Policy.

WASHINGTON -- If or when the Pentagon lets women become
infantry troops -- the country's front-line warfighters -- how many
women will want to?

The answer is probably not many.

Interviews with a dozen female soldiers and Marines showed little
interest in the toughest fighting jobs. They believe they'd be unable to
do them, even as the Defense Department inches toward changing its
rules to allow women in direct ground combat jobs.

In fact, the Marines asked women last year to go through its tough
infantry officer training to see how they would fare. Only two
volunteered and both failed to complete the fall course. None has
volunteered for the next course this month. The failure rate for men is
roughly 25 percent.

For the record, plenty of men don't want to be in the infantry
either, though technically could be assigned there involuntarily, if
needed. That's rarely known to happen.

"The job I want to do in the military does not include combat arms,"
Army Sgt. Cherry Sweat said of infantry, armor and artillery
occupations. She installed communications equipment in 2008 in Iraq but
doesn't feel mentally or physically prepared for fighting missions.

"I enjoy supporting the soldiers," said Sweat, stationed in South
Carolina. "The choice to join combat arms should be a personal decision,
not a required one."

Added Marine Gunnery Sgt. Shanese L. Campbell, who had administrative
duties during her service in Iraq: "I actually love my job. ... I've
been doing it for 15 years, so I don't plan on changing my job skills."

She's an administrative officer at Twentynine Palms in California,
serving in a once all-male tank battalion as part of a Marine Corps
experiment to study how opening more jobs to women might work.

A West Point graduate working in the Pentagon estimates she's known
thousands of women over her 20-year army career and said there's no
groundswell of interest in combat jobs among female colleagues she
knows.

She asked to remain anonymous because in the military's warrior
culture, it's a sensitive issue to be seen as not wanting to fight, she
said. But her observations echoed research of the 1990s, another time of
big change in the military, when interviews with more than 900 Army
women found that most didn't want fighting jobs and many felt the issue
was being pushed by "feminists" not representing the majority, said RAND
Corporation sociologist Laura Miller.

Much has happened for women since then in American society and the
military. Foremost in the military is perhaps that the Iraq and
Afghanistan wars changed the face of combat and highlighted the need for
women to play new roles.

Women already can be assigned to some combat arms jobs such as
operating the Patriot missile system or field artillery radar, but
offensive front-line fighting jobs will be the hardest nut to crack.
Many believe women eventually could be in the infantry, but the Pentagon
for years has been moving slowly on that front.

In April 1993, the Pentagon directed the opening of combat aviation
occupations and warship assignments to females; the Navy and Air Force
responded by opening thousands of jobs. Neither of those steps put women
in the most lethal occupations such as infantry or tank units. Policy
barred them not only from specific jobs but also from doing traditional
jobs in smaller units closest to the front.

That arrangement came apart in Iraq and Afghanistan, where battle
lines were jagged and insurgents could be anywhere. Some women in
support jobs, including logistics officers bringing supply convoys to
troops, found themselves in firefights or targeted by roadside bombs.
Women were sent on patrol with men to search and get information from
local women whose culture didn't allow male soldiers to do so.

Developments over the past decade have been a main argument from
those wanting more openings for women. So has the issue of equal
opportunity and the fact that combat service gives troops an advantage
for promotions, the lack of it leaving women disadvantaged in trying to
move to the higher ranks.

"If there are women able to meet the required standard, then why not
let them fight if they so desire?" said Maj. Elizabeth L. Alexander.
Since 2002, she hass served in Pakistan once and Iraq three times in
supply and maintenance jobs and is now with the 3rd Army in South
Carolina.

More than 200,000 U.S. women have served in the wars, 12 percent of
the Americans sent. Of some 6,600 Americans killed, 152 were women; 84
of them were killed by enemy action and 68 in nonhostile circumstances
such as accidents, illness and suicide.

In February, the department altered rules to reflect realities of the
decade, opening some new jobs and officially allowing women into many
jobs they were already doing, but in units closer to the fighting. The
new policy still bans women from being infantry soldiers, Special
Operations commandos, and others in direct combat, but opened some
14,000 previously male-only positions, mostly in the Army, such as
artillery mechanic and rocket launcher crew member. More than 230,000
positions remain closed to women, who are 15 percent of the 1.4 million
in all branches.

Hundreds of female soldiers began moving into once all-male
battalions, taking jobs they already had trained for, such as in
personnel, intelligence, signal corps, medicine and chaplaincy.
Forty-five women Marines similarly went to battalions as part of a large
research effort to gauge how women might do.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has been studying reports from the
services to update him on progress with the newly opened positions,
what's being done to pursue gender-neutral physical standards and what
barriers remain and whether more positions can be opened.

Panetta could announce the next step in the coming weeks, which might
mean anything from further openings to simply further study.

"Yes, there may be a small number of women who are interested," said
Katy Otto, spokeswoman for the Service Women's Action Network, an equal
opportunity advocacy group. "But does that mean they should be barred
from entry?"

Lory Manning of Women's Research and Education Institute said female interest could be greater than expected.

"I think they'll be surprised by the number that will come forward,"
said the 25-year Navy veteran who retired in the 1990s. She said the
Navy faced a similar question then: Did women want to go to sea?

"If you asked someone in 1985 about going to sea, she would have been
thinking: `Girls don't do that and so I don't want to do that,'"
Manning said. "But when push came to shove, they did it, they loved it."

Changing the rules for a potential future draft would be a difficult proposition.

The Supreme Court has ruled that because the Selective Service Act is
aimed at creating a list of men who could be drafted for combat - and
women are not in combat jobs - American women aren't required to
register upon turning 18 as all males are. If combat jobs open to women,
Congress would have to decide what to do about that law.

Yep, if they want to go, let them. A woman's life is not just all about having babies. Some women can't have children. There are men that can do a heck of a lot better raising kids with mom deployed than some men deployed and the woman is home. I'm doing the best I can here at the home front but I know he can get more out of the kids than I can. He wouldn't have to yell, nag or plea. Yeah, it's come down to that in this house. I wouldn't want to be deployed but I don't get the respect I should get. It's not just from the kids either. I have become anti social. Just tired of the drama and being everyone's b. Most of the moms I meet have kids much younger than mine. I admire families that have two parents serving. I don't know how they do it but they make it work.

I think it's a tired topic that keeps coming up over and over. There are a lot of women who could do just as good a job as men. In the end, though it doesn't really matter what I think, all that matters is what the military wants and will allow.

women should be allowed to do any job they want as long as they can hack it. if they cant meet the standards of the job that are meant to keep them safe and capable of doing the job then no they arent allowed just like men who cant hack it arent allowed. but baning us from jobs because we were born with the wrong equipment...not cool.

absolutely not. there are places in the military that women do not belong, infantry, subs,special forces,etc. women want to be treated fairly and given the same opportunities in the military but arent willing to meet the same physical requirements as their male counterparts.

I think out of 100 women who think they can do it there is .1 women who could.

It's sad because I am a woman who thinks I can. But over the years and meeting how women are...well no they can't handle that. Not combined with men. Men can't handle women in it either. And women can't handle it with men. It would be a debacle.

I wish I could say yes because up until about a year ago I would say if they can hack it then yes, but honestly, I have to say no. Maybe if it was an all women unit. But I can't say yes right now. Not today.

by Anonymous 2
on Jan. 9, 2013 at 1:45 PM

you cant really say there are places where women are allowed and then there are places were men are allowed. if a women wants to do the job so be it. women can do anything that a man can do.

Send me email updates about messages I've received on the site and the latest news from The CafeMom Team.
By signing up, you certify that you are female and accept the Terms of Service and have read the
Privacy Policy.